How do you protect yourself from small supplier’s BIG issues?
This blog of mine is different from the rest. Here I am not going to analyze data, neither am I going to profess inferences….. I am going to ask you about your opinion on certain very key factors which impact risks in supply chain. I was in a discussion with the Head of Supply Chain of a large manufacturing house, and some of his views on managing suppliers for their supply chain intrigues me. That is the reason I am looking out to seek your opinion on some of the aspects of supply chain.
How do you classify suppliers as a “small” supplier? Generally suppliers are classified based on multiple criteria like size of business, years of loyalty, quality/cost/delivery performance etc. But how do you classify one supplier as small? Because if it is on the size of your business with the supplier, then it is very likely that in certain circumstances this supplier may have large business relationship with some of your competitors…. And you may be losing the necessary foresight to develop potential enhanced business with. If on the contrary you go by the size of revenue that this supplier has globally, then it may be likely that this supplier may not be profitable or relevant to pursue in terms of the regional issues or due to a certain preference you have with some of your “keiretsu” suppliers.
Or is it that you classify a supplier as small because of the type of products that are procured. E.g. a fastener manufacturer may be treated as a small supplier against a cylinder block manufacturer for an engine manufacturing firm. But is that the right classification? A small fastener like a “Oil venture” if blocked or cracked, would cause havoc to your engine and lead to major damage. See the case of CTS a “small” supplier, has caused the damage of reputation to Toyota worldwide. Even for electronic gadgets, the small supplier who does “passivation” the fasteners would cause major recalls if this has corrosion or electronic continuity issues. So, would you be looking at size of the supplier based on the risk impact that the supplier’s products can cause to your business.
The basic question now is that how would you protect you business from risk caused by these “small” suppliers? You have limited resources at your disposal to monitor suppliers for their development, manufacturing capability and integrity, delivery and other performance parameters. Is it enough to have a system which has good integration of data between your suppliers and your own? How much amount of data can you monitor? There are issues regarding the latest regulations on Heavy metals and other toxic material’s usage, packaging material usage, managing effluents and other pollutants from their plants, labor laws, import restrictions in terms of quotas, anti-terrorism compliance like CT-PAT, tariffs etc. Even though most of these parameters are known to buyers, but for the “small” suppliers how much of this can be maintained and monitored?
There are no conclusions to be drawn here….. the board to quite blank. I would invite your opinion and your experience in these areas, as I am sure these are some of the critical challenges which would be experienced across the “Buyer community”.





Comments
here the focus should not be the size of the supplier. Small firm have been the sources of great innnovations.(which stems from risk appetite)
When a small supplier commits his entire production to auto maker he is taking a huge risk too.
Irrespective of size of the supplier toyota or GM or Ford throughly check the process and procedures and use the component only after extensive testing.
We will be unfair if we say that only supplier is responsible for the defect that dented toyota's reputation unless it is proven so with hard evidence. The high profit margins of the automotive brands are attributable to the small size of suppliers to whom they dictate terms, do a value analysis of their components and fix a price (that is mostly unilateral).
many big firms have committed huge blunders and enron and one of big 5 consulting firm that perished with it a simple and straight example.
After all why are we forgetting the fundamental concept of risk management.
Risk will have an accompanying reward and you may not get reward everytime.
Posted by: mallik | March 2, 2010 6:20 PM